NCARB Southern ConferenceMember Board/Educator's MeetingCharlotte February 16-17, 2007

SUMMARY REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS AND RESPONSESCo-Chairs: Kevin Montgomery, FAIA NCARB (O’Brien Atkins, Research Triangle Park, NC)

Ken Lambla, AIA (Dean, College of Architecture, Univ. North Carolina-Charlotte)

Leadership Development in Higher Education and PracticeThe goal of this meeting is to examine how leadership skills are learned and practiced in education and professional settings. Two questions will guide the meeting organization: How architects can be better leaders, and how can we educate students to possess the foundation for a career of leadership?

Contents1. Overview 12. Schedule / Participants 33. Keynote Addresses:

John L. Atkins III, FAIA, O’Brien Atkins (Research Triangle Park, NC) 4Kevin McCarthy, Metanoic Dialogue (Sunnyvale, CA) 5

4. Morning Panel / Group Work Sessions 65. Afternoon Panel / Group Work Sessions 86. General Remarks 107. Appendices

a. Leadership Development Readings / Cynthia Wolf Johnson 11b. “Promoting Leadership: Developing Citizen Professionals/Concepts for the

Professionalism Curriculum” / Kevin McCarthy 13c. “Preparing for Leadership: The Case for Leadership Education in

Architecture Schools” / David Hinson 14d. Speaker Biographies 21

1

NCARB Southern ConferenceMember Board/Educator's MeetingCharlotte, NC :: February 16-17, 2007

To all Board Members, Educators, and Guests:

We welcome you to Charlotte, North Carolina and the College of Architecture at the University of North Carolina-Charlotte for these meetings and discussions. It is our pleasure that you have chosen to join in a national debate about the “Architect-Leader.” Our goal is simple on the surface: We hope to better understand how leadership skills are formed through the educational process and then extended in practice to create a culture of architects as community leaders. Our agenda is also simple: the morning is dedicated to how practice might better position itself for truly public leadership; the afternoon is dedicated to examining how our educational processes might change to better prepare graduates for a career of leadership. Nothing is that simple; we hope to unveil some truly knotty problems in our culture!

The package we distribute contains key readings, summary notes of presentations, and papers. We will record the discussion to present “proceedings” in the form of a “white paper” which may be used in discussions with your collateral organizations – AIA, NCARB, ACSA, NAAB, EPN, to name but a few.

It will be a busy and tightly scheduled day but we hope you have time to visit both the City and the College.

Thank you!

Ken Lambla, AIA Kevin Montgomery, AIADean, College of Architecture Principal, Director of ArchitectureUNC Charlotte O’Brien/Atkins AssociatesCo-Chair Research Triangle Park, NC

Co-Chair

2

SCHEDULE

Overview: 8:30 – 9:15 AM Ken Lambla, AIA (UNC Charlotte) & Kevin Montgomery, AIA (O’Brien Atkins)

Morning Session: 9:15 – 11:30 AMKeynote: John L. Atkins III, FAIA, O’Brien Atkins

First Vice-Chair, NC Citizens for Business and IndustryFraming the “world of leadership”

Panel: Bob Glusenkamp, Rodgers Builders Inc.Jeff Huberman, FAIA, Gantt Huberman ArchitectsMichael Smith, Charlotte Center City PartnersKaren Alexander, AIA, KKA Architects

Group Work Sessions / Reporting : academics and practitioners (separately)

11:30 – Noon: Panel Response & Provocateur: Cynthia Wolf Johnson, Ed.D

(lunch & building tour)

Afternoon Session: 1:00 – 4:00 PMKeynote: Kevin McCarthy, Metanoic Dialogue Group (San Jose, CA)

Architecture as an educational model of leadership

Panel: David Hinson, AIA, Auburn UniversityTed Landsmark, Boston Architecture College/ACSAWayne Drummond, FAIA, U.Nebraska/NAAB

Group Work Sessions / Reporting : academics and practitioners (separately)

3:30 – 4:00 PM: Panel Response & Provocateur: Cynthia Wolf Johnson, Ed.D

Closing: 5:00 PM

3

KEYNOTE ADDRESSES

Morning: Leadership in PracticeJohn L. Atkins III, FAIA, O’Brien Atkins

“Framing the ‘world of leadership’ “

Two themes presented: a) seeking to frame the picture, and b) the practitioner as leader

Framing the Picture:Stop thinking like an architect, start thinking like those other forces out there that are affecting architects and their practice. Field has changed from one person being able to do everything to each individual specializing in a specific area

Changes in the Profession: Contracts – Interiors – Client RelationsBUT: Regardless, public understands architects to be creative problem-solvers.“Value positions of our service”: crucial to preventing architects from becoming commodities

Myths that exacerbate the problem:Myth #1: the romantic architect (i.e. the gifted, all-knowing individual who can single-handedly complete the design problem); this myth persists in academia as well; this myth prevents architects from facing challenges and reality of the 21st century, i.e. the fact of collaboration, teamwork, and complexities of design that require effective leadership. Practice is infinitely ahead of academia on leadership issues

Myth #2: “It’s all about design” It’s also about budget, schedule, function, and leadership.Both schools and practice don’t put necessary resources into teaching leadership skills: schools lack it in the curriculum, and practices don’t invest in training staffDone only because forces outside architecture demanded it but if and when they invest in it, you find people who succeed and excel in it, sometimes beyond the principals’ own abilities.

We live in a world of speed and the instantaneous: Revamping of the submission of design documents: not a demand for lower quality or

design excellence, rather a collapse of phases in response to demands for shorter timelines and less patient clients

2nd phase of technological revolution: integrated information documents globalization—outsourcing yes, but also opportunities for competition

Leadership in the Profession and in the Community:Profession/Firm: Jim Collins’ Level V leader: compelling modesty in contrast to “I-centric” style of comparative leaders; they talk of other executives and the company but not about themselves or their own contribution

Community: Non-architectural venues: church, bond referendums, greenway creation, etc. Politics—a way to give access by gaining access (? Is this leadership?)

“Be a leader first, an architect second.”

4

KEYNOTE ADDRESSES

Afternoon: Leadership in EducationKevin McCarthy, Metanoic Dialogue Group (San Jose, CA)

“Architecture as an educational model of leadership”(full presentation attached in hardcopy)

Opening themes: leaders go through renewals; they sit in a “sea of change”; they are “un-barnacles” “Change is another word for learning” Every leader should ask him/herself: “What won’t change until I die?”

However, talk of collaboration is all well and good but, “when accountability and millions of dollars come into play, collaboration starts to shudder.”

New client-professional relationship: Instead of the professional who holds the knowledge that is doled out to takers, the client today wants professionals who house the knowledge that seeks to be extracted—it is an interactive relationship.

Starting points when looking to teach students leadership:“Are they competent citizens?”“Do they have the capacity to deal with themselves?”

Crucial issue: Do people have a capacity for dialogue?

Leadership is contextually driven, with four points of leadership emphasized:1. Profound ability to get to clarity (not only for themselves but for the group)2. Profound ability to deal with dissent3. Emotional intelligence and social intelligence: they know how to bring diverse people

together - convening power4. Ambidexterity: leaders know how to do many different things and operate in different ways—

no “one size fits all” mentality

“Dissent is always the beginning of learning”Leaders live in a constant state of anxiety—“I know I’m sort of right” (This is as much an anxiety of learning.)

Specialists are necessary in the problem-solving process, but there’s also a need for generalists, which is to say those who look at the whole.

What people look for in professionals:1. efficacy: do you know what you’re doing2. satisfaction; requires some level of participation on part of public3. meaning: intrinsic qualities that come from involvement

Pro-bono work in but one method, but it raises two important venues: it is an issue of civil liberty; to protect the right to live in a free and democratic society, and brings professionals back into the conversation in the community.

5

MORNING PANEL

Bob Glusenkamp, Rodgers Builders Inc.Jeff Huberman, FAIA, Gantt Huberman ArchitectsMichael Smith, Charlotte Center City PartnersKaren Alexander, AIA, KKA Architects

The morning panelists, three practitioners and one non-architect professional, put forward a number of value-based definitions of leadership, some leaning more heavily on the role of economic growth as part of being a leader as an architect. Innovation is seen as key to future leadership – the “Chief Innovation Officer” and the role of the creative thinker are essential in all forms of leadership. An emphasis on freeing up time and money for employees to be able to engage in their communities as leaders was also a theme along with an emphasis on collaboration and seeking innovation. The architect’s training in creative problem-solving was seen as one of the primary modes through which s/he can act as a leader in the community and not necessarily in architecture-specific ways. “If you get involved, leave it better than you found it.”Emphasize three methods to establish firm leadership in community: 1) collaborating within the firm and community; 2) acting as change agents through search for innovation; and, 3) providing value-based services for clients in tangible ways.Pro bono work as an outlet for young professionals in the field resurfaced several times in the conversation. ACSA President Ted Landsmark noted three advantages of pro bono: (1) it opens the firm to a broader client base; (2) gives young hires a sense of authority over the work they’re doing; and (3) provides opportunities to develop networking skills.

MORNING WORK SESSIONPractitioners and Educators were separated into two separate groups for each work session to compare responses to the question posed and strategies for action. (See Summary for Results)

Morning Session: Leadership Development in Practice A. Rank the following leadership competencies in order of significance to long-term

professional capability (source: Leadership Professionals Handbook):o Communicationso Teamworko Creative Problem Solvingo Interpersonal Skillso Manage Client Relationshipso Self-Directiono Integrityo Create and Lead Teamso Assess Situations Quickly and Accuratelyo Foster Conflict Resolutions (win-win)o Project Managemento Implement Employee Involvement Strategieso Coach and Train Peers and Subordinateso Flexibilityo Build appropriate relationshipso Professionalism

6

o Financial skill

B. What actions can you take to improve these competencies in both career and educational settings? List at least four actions for the top five competencies.

Practitioners and educators worked in dramatically different ways to approach this task with practitioners voting to establish a set of most important capabilities and educators spending most of their time defining terms. This permitted practitioners to focus on the most important action item: How do we continue the educational process in teaching interns? (This is a dramatically important result as the realization of how teaching effectiveness is a shared value and continuity is shared result.)Communication and an awareness of the financial workings of architecture were the two most discussed aspects of the listed competencies on the practitioner side of the salon. The issue of financing, cost modeling, and budget analyses are normally not part of the intern experience, practitioners agreed, even though it is the duty of the architect to be good stewards of their client’s money. For Bob Glusenkamp, the financial know-how is crucial to participating in civic activities such as community committees when it becomes a simple matter of knowing the language. By the end of the session, the practitioners turned the lens back onto themselves to ask the question: How do we teach the young architects that are coming into offices? The understanding of a need for a continuation of the architect’s education that goes beyond the academy’s scope was thus acknowledged as something beyond IDP hours.

Morning Session: RESPONDENT / PROVOCATEUR (Dr. Cynthia Wolf Johnson)Wolf Johnson highlighted the distinction between the industrial and post-industrial paradigms of leadership is that the former was about stability while the latter is about change and risk-taking (thus the anxiety of current practitioners as expressed by Atkins is not so hard to understand).

Industrial: male oriented, focus on structure and management and independent leaders; goal-based; materialistic ethical perspective; rational; technocratic; linear; quantitative language and methodology

Post-industrial Collaboration, global concern; civic virtues; freedom of expression; qualitative language and methodologies; consensus-oriented policymaking process; recognizing influence of culture; importance of relationships

Rost 1993: definition of leadership: “Influence relationship among leaders and their collaborators who intend real changes that reflect their mutual purposes.”Rost’s 4 types of leaders: structural, social, human resource, and political

How are we ‘framing the discussion? -knowledge, skills, values, attitude, and behaviors

Relational model of leadership: overlapping adjective bubbles—inclusive, purposeful, empowering, and ethical—arranged around a central qualifier “process-oriented”

NB. It’s about risk management. It seems the source of most of this anxiety about bringing leadership into the education of architects is focused around a much more traditional, unsurprising attitude toward change.

7

AFTERNOON PANEL

David Hinson, AIA, Auburn UniversityTed Landsmark, Boston Architecture College/ACSAWayne Drummond, FAIA, U.Nebraska/NAAB

The three panelists of the afternoon focused on the need for a progressive approach to the leadership question: “why to” training in addition to “how to,” the sense of ownership necessary for entering professionals, and the role of technology and globalization in changing the field of architecture. (The failure of certain regulatory systems was clearly stated but to limited response.)There was an expressed concern that leadership issues are in many disciplines but they started responding before now so the design profession is behind. Peripheral vision is crucial for architects (a vision for the profession and/or a given firm).To move forward, architects must go from being harbors of good taste to protectors of the public realm.The majority of design faculty (and practitioners) have no formal training in education so to “fall back” to education – by practitioners in schools, within firms, faculty to community – may not be as effective as one might assume.The separation of design programs from the rest of the university exists on the faculty level as well so the design faculty fails to connect with other professors in the university who know a lot more about education as such.Potential problems of the profession:

We’re shrinking; architecture is becoming a boutique profession; Technology and substantial hesitancy to introduce software into the academy, e.g. Revit; Diversity: both the academy and the profession fail to reflect the society they serve; Outsourcing: making interns and IDP obsolete.

Needed “I’s”: Institutional Integrity: what your are teaching them to prepare them for commencement Imbedded Intelligence: building information management Interoperability: technological compatibility Integrated Practice International/Intercultural

Prescriptive vs. Performative strategies

AFTERNOON WORK SESSIONPractitioners and Educators were separated into two separate groups for each work session to compare responses to the question posed and strategies for action. (See Summary for Results)

Afternoon Session: Leadership Development in Education A. Which three educational outcomes do you consider most significant to graduating students

as they approach professional leadership roles? (source: Harvard Business Review)o Humilityo Energyo Intuitiono Visiono Integrityo Perspectiveo Passion

8

o Convictiono Learning from mistakes

B. For the top three outcomes, list the most relevant assessment measures and evidence of learning quality. Also include most effective learning environment for top three.

Again, educators focused on defining terms and practitioners moved to their tested methodology of voting to identify a consensual range of outcomes to focus on. Practitioners seemed to be searching for ways to assess whether entering professionals possessed the qualities of a future leader as they were listed for each group. These assessments relied heavily on traditional means: portfolio, interview, transcripts, extracurricular interests, and a sense of direction or initiative that might be manifested through these typical architectural media.

Afternoon Session: RESPONDENT / PROVOCATEUR (Dr. Cynthia Wolf Johnson)The noted absence of the language of leadership in the literature provided by most architecture colleges to incoming students displays a clear lack of thinking about leadership as its own skill to be honed in the discipline. It was made very clear that the lack of leadership training is not resolved by adding a course or two. Rather, it requires developing the sort of knowledge, skills, attitude, values, and behaviors that will lead to architects taking active roles as leaders in the field and in the community.

Comments from graduate students Jessica Thomas and Christine Abbot: Although students were present all day and participants talked about reaching out to

students / young professionals, they were not addressed until the last moments of the day. Architects (faculty and practitioners alike) create a sense of isolation through an educational

model all-too-focused on “the studio,” with students then lacking the balance with other courses that could potentially enrich their design work.

There was a focus on the execution of leadership, i.e., good communication skills, rather than a justification for leadership, i.e., integrity, problem-solving ability; schools might promote talented and insightful designers to become leaders, as opposed to hoping that more tenacious and confident individuals are the best designers.

To address this anxiety of the new generation of students/professionals: Today’s students were raised or taught by the people in the room; as examples of how

progressive educational strategies have affected the next generation of professionals. We have been doing collaboration / group work since elementary school; it’s not new! Grasp of technology and a global perspective is expected not unusual.Points made by Kevin McCarthy might help group to understand this younger generation:1. Ambidexterity: we were raised to be multi-taskers; technologically driven as well as socially (i.e. extracurricular)2. Dissent: we are a generation taught not to be happy with “Because I said so” answers. We are trained to question and to ask “why.” “Professors and Practitioners are leaders to us by default until they prove otherwise, but that doesn’t mean that we won’t ask questions.” “Negotiation has been a part of our lives since childhood. It is not a question of authority but understanding the reasons behind a task, policy, etc.”3. “Whole-Generalists”: We look outside of work for fulfillment; we think globally and want to do meaningful work. This automatically implies an awareness of community.

9

“Take advantage of the skills of this new generation, and avoid regarding questions and requests for guidance as signs of belligerent or misguided youth.”

10

GENERAL REMARKS

Co-Chairs Kevin Montgomery and Ken Lambla wish to thank all participants for a fruitful and reflective day. As the tradition of the NCARB Board/Educator Meeting has its origins in a search for common ground, this day presented a unique opportunity to reflect not only on the instrumental skills of leaders in our profession but the foundations for leadership education, changes in leadership theories, external perspectives on the role of professional leaders and the motivations for leadership development in architecture.

Not unexpected, the day demonstrated a profound for a common language to address leadership education and the continuity between educational institutions and practice. Of particular note, the distinction between authority and leadership; architects have for a long time been “authorities” on buildings and the knowledge gained from practice but there exists a distinct gap in whether this prepares them for leadership in a broader context. We have, perhaps, focused too long on the technical versus adaptive problems in our work and communities.

Another theme that obviously surfaced focused on the foundation of leadership skills; “traditional” studio-based models of education may not be the most fruitful pedagogy to instill a sense of value for integrated knowledge, broad communication skills and the ability to develop collaborative teams, to take a few examples. The difficulty in the morning work session in identifying a few key leadership competencies results in broad ambiguity: What do we teach? How do we know the competency exists? How is that competency assessed against other individuals?

The meeting provided the opportunity to reflect on how leadership involves our moral codes and self-images, if even in the service orientation which many speakers addressed the topic. Heifetz (“Leadership Without Easy Answers,” 1994) reminds us that leadership is more than influence and that leadership competencies (for students and practitioners) and leadership development (in the profession) is not limited to our service to our communities. While we often define successful leadership as “transformational,” it is more often the case that leadership skill requires the ability to adapt. “Adaptive work” (described by McCarthy in his keynote) aligns leadership with the ability to learn, address conflicts, and work in between people values and the reality they see daily.

Just as it was pointed out that many architectural faculty have little or no formal education in teaching, it is also the case that few faculty and practitioners have a formal education in leadership skills. Knowing who one is, developing social and cultural sophistication, working across race, ethnic and gender lines, and learning through adaptation are important challenges. At the center of this process is enhancing the ability to learn through experience.

We trust this is a beginning.

11

APPENDIX A:RECOMMENDED READINGS(from Cynthia Wolf Johnson, Ed.D., Associate Provost for Academic Affairs, UNC Charlotte)

Astin, H. S., & Leland, C. (1991). Women of influence, women of vision: A cross-generational study of leaders and social change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bolman, L. G. & Deal, T. (2001). Leading with soul: An uncommon journey of spirit. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Collins, J. (2001). Good to great. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

Connerley, M.L. & Pedersen, P.B. (2005). Leadership in a diverse and multicultural environment: Developing awareness, knowledge, and skills. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Coomes, M.D. & DeBard, R. (2004). Serving the millennial generation. New Directions for Student Services (106), 33-45.

Gardner, J. W. (1990). On leadership. New York: The Free Press.

Goddard, K.E., Gonzalez-Herrera, V. & Hernandez, M. (2002). Leadership and Latinos: A blending of cultures. Concepts and Connections: A Newsletter for Leadership Educators, 11 (1), 1-4.

Helgesen, S. (1990). The female advantage: Women’s ways of leadership. New York: Doubleday.

Heifetz, R.A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Johnson, C.W. (1995). College student leadership in multiracial, multiethnic environments: An exploratory and descriptive study. (Doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University, 1995). Dissertation Abstracts International.

Huber, N.S. & Harvey, M. (Ed.) (2006). Leadership at the crossroads. A volume in the International Leadership Association series Building Leadership Bridges. College Park, MD: The James MacGregor Burns Academy of Leadership.

Komives, S.R., Lucas, N. & McMahon, T.R. (2007). Exploring leadership: For college students who want to make a difference (2nd edition). San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Kouzes, J. M. & Posner, B. Z. (1999). Encouraging the heart. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kouzes, J. M. & Posner, B. Z. (1995). The leadership challenge: How to get extraordinary things done in organizations (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Morrison, A.M. (1992). The new leaders: Guidelines on leadership diversity in America. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

12

Northouse, P.G. (2007). Leadership theory and practice (4th edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Rost, J. C. (1991). Leadership for the 21 st century . New York: Praeger.

Rost, J.C. (1993). Leadership development in the new millenium. Journal of Leadership Studies 1(1), 92-110.

W. K. Kellogg Foundation (2000). Leadership reconsidered: Engaging higher education in social change. Battle Creek, MI: W.K. Kellogg Foundation. http://www.wkkf.org/pubs/CCT/Leadership/Pub3368.pdf

13

APPENDIX B:“Promoting Leadership – Developing Citizen Professionals: Concepts for the Professionalism Curriculum” by Kevin McCarthy

(Attached hardcopy)

14

APPENDIX C:

Preparing for Leadership: The Case for Leadership Education in Architecture Schools

DAVID W. HINSONAuburn University

Introduction

“Perhaps never in history have the talents, skills, the broad vision and the ideals of architecture been more urgently needed” Ernest Boyer and Lee Mitgang 1

“It’s a challenge to all of us as AIA members to boldly vision a better future for ourselves and our profession in the 21st century. “Better” in the sense of better education, better preparation to act effectively, better partners, better citizens. A constant focus (of the 1999 AIA Convention speakers) was the potential – indeed the obligation – for us as architects to expand our influence by embracing the call and responsibility of leadership”. Michael J. Stanton, FAIA 2

“The habit of leadership begins in school…we must breed a culture of engagement with our communities rather than foster the reclusive role that architects seem to play. There can be no reclusiveness for a profession that designs the environments for human activity.” Ronald Altoon, FAIA 3

As the profession of architecture endeavors to “redefine” itself 4, many are calling for architects to act as leaders in a broad spectrum of venues, from our relationship with others in the design and construction industry to the civic/political arena. Many of these calls to leadership include a plea for more leadership skill development in schools of architecture; however, these calls often fail to articulate a clear distinction of what skills are required, or even a clear definition of “leadership” within the context of architectural practice. Perhaps more significantly, we have not tackled the toughest question of all, which is “leadership to what end?”. Are we improving our leadership skills as a means to more power and authority, or as a means to creating a better built environment?

Can we develop insights into the leadership approaches most appropriate to the broad spectrum of private and public spheres we hope and dream of influencing? Contemporary leadership studies suggest that leadership skills and style are not a one-size-fits-all solution and that inappropriate approaches to leadership (and followership) can undermine the plans of those with the best of intentions 5. If Ronald Altoon is right, that “the habit of leadership begins in school”, how do educators begin to cultivate an ethic of leadership and engagement in future practitioners? What training do we need to offer our students to foster the sea change in self-perception that the leaders of our profession are calling for? To effect positive change in any of our targeted arenas we (practitioners and educators) must first articulate a vision of our leadership goals, and identify the approach to leadership most effective in those settings.

15

This paper will look at the models of leadership which might be effective in some of the settings where architects find opportunities to lead, and will explore how these leadership skills might be developed inside students’ academic experience.

Reframing the Architect’s Role

Throughout our history, the profession of architecture has struggled with competing (and often conflicting) visions of our relationship to our clients, to collaborators within the design and construction industry, and with the larger society 6. As with other professions, our attitudes towards each of these groups have evolved in response to shifts in the economy and structure of the construction industry, shifts in the legal framework of practice (particularly our view of risk and liability), and shifts in the relationship between professions and society in general. In the last twenty years in particular, architects have seen significant erosion in their power and authority relative to other participants in the design and construction process. The response to these phenomena has been varied, but in general it seems that the profession is dismayed by the loss and anxious to halt it 7. In response the AIA, the architectural press, and to some degree our professional schools have sought to encourage architects to (re) assert “leadership” within the design and construction industry and to expand their sphere of influence in the civic and political arenas that influence the physical environment. Advocates for this “engagement” initiative cite a range of reasons for the urgency of their call. Leading practitioners, educators, politicians and theorists have gone as far as to assert that the future of our profession and our communities hinges on our ability to reframe the architect's leadership role.

These calls to leadership highlight the conflict between our desire to exercise more power and authority as a profession, and the service ethic engrained in our oldest professional ideals. An example of these competing motivations can be found in the AIA’s current “Livable Communities Initiative”, intended to both effect much needed positive change in our communities and to position the profession as a powerful “player” in the emerging public discourse over growth and sprawl. The “enlightened self-interest” inherent in this example is not a bad thing; however, it illustrates the confusion surrounding the term leadership, a confusion we must address before we can prepare students to be truly effective leaders.

Since the Second World War, leadership has emerged as a field of study within many academic settings and other research institutions. Examples include public policy leadership programs such as the Kennedy School of Government, the Hubert Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, and efforts by private foundations such as the W.K. Kellogg Foundation and the Kettering Foundation to support leadership development through fellowships and grant making. As a result of five decades of study and reflection, a complex and nuanced understanding of leadership has emerged, along with an awareness that leadership is context sensitive – the way one leads is highly contingent on the situation. Popular views of leadership, however, are largely shaped by observation of leaders in politics, private enterprise, and hierarchtical organizations 8. This view centers on the expectation that leaders will be heroes - men or women of

16

passion and vision and the courage to act on these qualities. This view seems to exert strong influence over architects as well, and plays to our deeply held values regarding the transformative power of design and designers. This traditional view of leadership relies heavily on the belief in personal characteristics as a determinant of leadership success - that one is mysteriously anointed with leadership qualities, or learns them at the knee of an inspiring mentor 9. The qualities that characterize this view of leadership include decisiveness, persuasiveness, assertiveness, commitment, and courage. Our system of educating architects encourages and cultivates some of these traits (commitment to design quality for example), but has acknowledged weakness regarding others (such as verbal and written communication – key tools of persuasion) 10. This view of leadership has undoubtedly motivated many architects to remarkable accomplishments, however it also has the unfortunate consequence of relegating those who don’t see themselves as “anointed” to the sidelines (and off the hook).

Organizational Leadership

Another influence on our understanding of leadership and its requisite skills comes from a focus on leadership in corporate and institutional settings. The decade of the 1980’s saw a remarkable expansion in leadership research. Practicing architects, like their peers across the spectrum of American businesses, have become fascinated with organizational leadership theory. As one could expect given the hierarchical management structure of most firms and the significant growth in the size of architectural practices, much of the focus has been on the roles of firm principles and senior managers as organizational leaders. Organizational leadership theory, although still strongly tied to a focus on setting objectives (immortalized as “the vision thing” in the 1992 US presidential election), has moved away from the notion of a single form of leadership and has developed a heightened sensitivity to the relationship between leaders and followers and the overall context within which leaders act. At the forefront of this move towards understanding the role of leadership within architectural practice in the past two decades were groups such as The Coxe Group, David Maister, Jim Franklin, and others, who stressed the influence of the values and goals of principals on the shape of individual practices. This effort to understand how successful practices work has also resulted in an interest in the interpersonal skills that principals and mid-level managers must master to be effective at leading their growing practices. This has led to an increased interest in the cultivation of leadership skills, evidenced by the number of workshops, seminars and programs geared towards this topic at professional gatherings in the last two decades 11. A growing sense that the profession faces major pressures to adapt to the impact of information technology and to shifts in project delivery methods keep the interest in leadership methods and theory high. Characteristic of this interest are the essays of Richard Hobbs found in the monthly AIA newspaper, the AIArchitect. Hobbs, leader of the AIA’s Professional Practice Group regularly offers synopses of current business leadership theory, ranging from Peter Drucker to Wired magazine 12.

Insight into the demands of collaborative process - either within the context of increasingly larger architectural practices or in dealings with clients, builders and the

17

hosts of supporting participants to the design and construction process - is key to preparing students for the challenge of leadership in this time of “redefinition”. As educators, we must balance our traditional emphasis on the individual designer with an understanding of the inherently social dimension of design, and help our students develop the skills to successfully lead in collaborative endeavors. This skill set includes the foundation skills of speaking and writing with clarity as well as facilitation, mediation and negotiation skills, what Franklin calls “groupwork” 13. Research centered on the dynamics of leading innovative teams by Helga Hohn suggests that groups engaged in creative work (unique, non-routine) move through two distinctive modes of work – generative modes and focussing modes – which require different approaches to leadership if they are to be successful. Hohn suggests that leaders of creative teams must be equally skilled at the management of both processes and must know how to effectively combine the “process concerns” key to the generative mode with the “task concerns” 14 essential to the focussing mode.

Students should also be introduced to the notion of transforming leadership – the view of leadership that emphasizes the leader as servant, supporting and empowering others to help achieve a common goal. James MacGregor Burns’ vision of servant leadership calls on architects to look beyond the transactional nature of most exchanges in practice settings and to envision an elevated purpose to the practice of architecture. This model requires one to give up much of what we traditionally associate with power and authority – the autonomy to make decisions alone. This shift in perspective is especially important and challenging for architects because it is in conflict with our culture of individualism and our desire for design authority and autonomy. This notion of the leader as servant to the group of followers is where the profession’s conflicts between power and service must be addressed. As we come to understand more about leadership – especially leadership of creative processes, the paradigm of leadership as a means to power and authority is increasingly challenged.

Peripheral Vision

“The profession does very little to prepare would-be architects for the crowds of participants who will want a say in their projects” 15

In addition to developing the skills required to work more effectively with colleagues, architecture students must develop greater insight into the complex web of forces that shape design in the context of practice: clients, consultants and other design professionals, public agencies, community groups, city councils, financiers, etc. This can only be accomplished by designing curricula with opportunities to study and understand the interests and approaches of other disciplines that shape the environment, including other design disciplines (i.e. planning, landscape architecture, interior architecture, and engineering, as well as building construction, development and finance). To have the effect of expanding students’ leadership potential, however, these efforts to expand our ”peripheral vision” must be brought back into the design studio. Students must be challenged to integrate these often-contradictory viewpoints into their work, and to expand their understanding of design to include effective leadership of this ever-growing team of collaborators.

18

Interdisciplinary collaboration presents a distinct set of leadership challenges which are at odds with the way most schools prepare architects. Christopher Barlow of the Graduate School of Business at IIT 16 notes that in this interdisciplinary setting “a new kind of complexity comes into play”, in which the “truths” of different perspectives conflict with each other. In these contexts differences in cognitive style, cultural backgrounds, personality and values can destroy all hopes of collaboration. Barlow also notes that in our intensive efforts to teach students to understand a certain perspective, we generally only expose them to problems that can be solved in that perspective. The more success a student realizes in solving these “single domain” problems, the more likely they will encounter problems applying their knowledge in the complex and messy “multiple domain” context of the real world. I believe this challenge is particularly relevant for graduates of architecture schools, where as Dana Cuff notes students are most often exposed to “pure design” divorced from the dynamic context of practice 17. The result, according to Cuff, is a skewed understanding of design, and a missed opportunity to teach students the “social arts” essential to leadership in intra- and interdisciplinary collaborations.

Leadership in the Civic Arena

“There is so little involvement by architects in community organizations,” an Indianapolis architect told us. “You just don’t see it in our profession. We need to get the profession back to the status of community leaders” 18

The call to leadership in the community arena resonates deeply with the professional ideal of service to society codified in our ethical codes and taught in our professional schools. Over the last two decades in particular, leaders of the profession have been urging architects to become more directly involved in civic leadership, through public service on planning boards and in elected offices, as well as in advocacy roles related to community design and planning. While many of the leadership skills developed in practice settings will serve them well in this arena (i.e. collaborative process skills) other business-based approaches may fail to serve as effective means to positive results. The civic arena is different in many key ways from the leadership challenges of the professional office and collegial institutions, and architects must become sensitive to the differences to succeed as community leaders.

One key example of the difference between private and civic arenas can be found in the dispersal of decision-making power, or perhaps more significantly, the power to oppose decisions. Within the last thirty years, most U.S. cities have seen power shift from a small group of business and political leaders to a widely dispersed network of groups advocating for their “special interests”, thus “fragmenting power and political will” 19. This dispersal of power is readily evident in disputes over planning and development, where there seem to be an endless number of groups who can say “no”, but few empowered to find a way to say “yes”. When architects do wade into the civic arena, it is often as an advocate for one of the aforementioned “special interests, a role

19

framed too often by a transactional approach which makes it difficult to act (or at least to be seen as acting) in the broader public interest.

Leadership in the civic realm also requires a shift away from project-based thinking to broader systemic approaches to the challenges faced by many of our communities. Using Hohn’s perspective on leading creative efforts, leadership in many contemporary community settings requires more focus on process-centered skills (“have we created new ideas?”) than the task-centered leadership skills commonly developed in management settings (“have we solved the problem?”) 20. Sharon Sutton characterizes this as a shift from a “how-to”, vertical, discipline-bound thinking to a lateral thinking, “why-to” approach that can articulate ways to transcend the narrowly focussed self-interests that dominate debate over the physical environment 21.

Preparing for Civic Leadership

So how do we prepare architecture students for leadership skills in the civic realm?

As noted earlier, I believe one of the most effective places to begin is in the design studio. We must manage to broaden the framework of design projects in ways designed to help students understand the broad spectrum of interests that come into play - on even the smallest of projects, public or private - and we must help them develop the collaborative leadership skills to work effectively in these settings. For the past eight years, Auburn University’s Rural Studio program has allowed 5th Year students to program, design, and construct projects ranging from a small smokehouse adjacent to a private residence to several community centers. In addition to the technical challenges of constructing their designs, students must engage real clients, the economics of the project, and the full spectrum of civic groups, public agencies, funding sources, subcontractors and material vendors in an inclusive and inherently collaborative design process. As remarkable as the final structures are, the insight gained in the “making” of these mostly public projects is the real measure of their success. The experience of engaging the full spectrum of issues and problems involved in these projects has helped to prepare these students for leadership in their professional life in a unique and transforming way.

“As designers of the environment, architects’ intellectual leadership is needed…. to help clarify the personal and political actions that will preserve the nation’s quality of life in the twenty-first century.” 22

We must also help our students see beyond the narrow vision of the architect as steward of “good taste” to a vision of the architect as steward of the public interest in the physical realm. Connecting back to Burn’s view of transformative leadership, Sharon Sutton challenges architects to break out of a discipline-bound view of our role and to “unravel the dilemmas associated with place – to reconceive it as a collective, rather than private, property” 23. This “redefinition” of the architect’s civic role is perhaps the most critical challenge we face as educators. We must help students

20

see that our most valuable contribution is our ability to help communities envision the physical consequences of civic decisions, inserting into public discourse a perspective most often left off the table.

We can cultivate this focus on envisioning the public interest in the design studio by the projects we choose. Rather than focussing on “test tube” projects and assignments devoid of consequences beyond technical and/or formal concerns, we can design studio assignments that allow students to consider issues from the front lines of community debate over the physical realm. As a by-product of this pedagogical objective, the students’ work is often helpful in illustrating to political and community stakeholders the physical ramifications of the positions they’re advocating. It also provides communities with sets of possibilities they often never envisioned as possible.

As architectural educators we can involve students in the task of cultivating greater public awareness of the designed environment through participation in physical environmental education initiatives in grades K-12. These educational opportunities, along with other public education and awareness programs, increase a community’s understanding that almost every physical setting of their lives is the consequence of choices made in both the private and public realm.

“Perhaps more than any other time, it is during the college years that those qualities of competence, caring, and character should be cultivated.” 24

We can also have a tremendous impact on students’ vision of the architect’s role in society by the values and actions we model for them during their academic careers. Dana Cuff, echoed by Altoon, notes that “the ethos of the profession is born in schools” and that faculty are commonly the first professional architects students encounter in the socialization process of architecture school. Students form their first and often lasting perceptions of the behavior and beliefs that frame professional life based on the tacit and explicit values modeled by their faculty mentors. If we desire to cultivate a more "engaged profession", architecture curricula and architecture faculty must embrace an ethic of community outreach and engagement.

Conclusion

The tools we need to prepare for the challenge of leadership, the curriculum examples, studio formats and outreach programs, are already in existence at many schools of architecture. Community design centers, social issues studios, and public education initiatives have been a staple of architecture schools for decades. Many have established a strong culture of community service at the schools that utilize these tools. What we must do, however, is elevate leadership and service issues within the critical discourse of our professional schools and professional societies. This critical discourse must include both educators and practitioners in a collaborative examination of what we wish to accomplish through leadership, as well as how we can cultivate a culture of leadership within the profession of Architecture.

21

If the scholarship of leadership is a relative new comer to the academic scene, it is younger still when applied to our calling. Programs which engage in a critical discourse about the changing context of the architect’s role in practice and in society, such as the Center for the Study of Practice at the University of Cincinnati, are essential to the development of a deeper understanding of how leadership is applied to the context of practice. However, further research is urgently needed and our schools can provide an essential service to the profession by examining successful approaches to leadership within, and outside of, our discipline. I believe this examination will lend support to those among us calling for a re-examination of the “design culture” 25 which architecture schools have stubbornly adhered to since the profession emerged from its formative years in the late 19th Century.

Dana Cuff notes that Architecture’s professional ethos is built around design quality - that we assign design the status of a “master value” 26. Cultivation of this ethos begins on the first day of design studio and is reinforced through our professional lives. I believe that architecture students must hear and participate in critical discussions of leadership and service from the beginning of their professional training as well as throughout their internship and professional careers if we are to cultivate leadership as a master value within the profession. This will require a broadening of our skill sets, a broadening of our perspectives, and an examination of our motivations and professional culture – key steps to take if we are to meaningfully “embrace the call and responsibility of leadership” 27.

Notes

1 Boyer, Ernest and Mitgang, Lee Building Community: A new Future for Architecture and Education, The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1996, p 129.

2 Stanton, Michael J. “Bold Vision for a Better Future” in the AIArchitect, June 1999.3 Altoon, Ronald A. “The Legacy of Dreams, Trust, and Courage” in the AIArchitect, July 19984 Over the course of 1995 & 1996, the AIA’s Practice and Prosperity Task Force conducted a

series of meetings and workshops intended to develop a “framework for a redefined profession”. The findings of this effort were published in the AIArchitect and presented as a video entitled “Redefining the Architecture Profession”. A transcript of this video may be found on the AIA web site at www.e-architect.com/pia/redifprof/p&pvideo.asp

5 Chrislip, David E. and Larson, Carl E. Collaborative Leadership: how citizens and civic leaders can make a difference, Jossey-Bass, 1994

6 Cuff, Dana Architecture, The Story of Practice, MIT Press, 1991, Chapter 2: “Beliefs and Practice” 7 Fisher, Thomas, “Architects and Power” in Progressive Architecture, February 1992, pp. 47-51.8 Grint, Keith, Ed. Leadership: Classical, Contemporary and Critical Approaches, Oxford University

Press, 1997, Chapter 2 “Traditional Leadership” pp. 83-88.9 Ibid.10 Boyer and Mitgang, pp.83-88, & p. 13611 The American Institute of Architects Annual Convention is one of numerous venues for

professional development training and continuing education for practitioners. For at least a decade continuing education workshops at the Convention have focused on leadership and organizational management skills. At the 2000 Convention in Philadelphia there were over twenty workshops on this theme. A good example was a workshop entitled “Manager’s Boot Camp: Coaching Skills for the Leadership Advantage”, led by Elliott Jaffa, EdD.

12 Richard Hobbs, head of the Professional Practice Group at the national office of the AIA, writes a regular series of articles on current topics in architectural practice for the AIArchitect.

22

13 Franklin, James R., Architect’s Professional Practice Manual, McGraw Hill, 2000, Chapter 10:“Groupwork”.

14 Hohn, Helga D. “Social Dynamics and the Paradox of Leading an Innovative Team”. A paper presented at the “Collaborating Across Professional Boundaries” conference at IIT in November, 2000

15 Cuff, p. 7416 Barlow, Christopher M., “Creativity and Complexity in Cross Functional Teams” A paper

presented at the “Collaborating Across Professional Boundaries” conference at IIT in November, 2000

17 Cuff, p. 6618 Boyer and Mitgang, p. 14919 Chrislip and Larson, p. 20-2120 Hohn, Helga D. “Social Dynamics and the Paradox of Leading an Innovative Team”21 Sutton, Sharon “Power, Knowledge, and the Art of Leadership”, in Progressive Architecture, May,

1992, pp. 65-6822 Sutton, Sharon “Architecture as the Practice of Intellectual Leadership”, Practices 5/6, Center for

the Study of Practice, 1997, pp. 30-3123 Ibid., p. 3024 Boyer and Mitgang, p.15025 Fisher, Thomas R., “Critiquing the Design Culture”, In the Scheme of Things, University of

Minnesota Press, 200026 Cuff, p. 2127 Stanton, Michael J. “Bold Vision for a Better Future” in the AIArchitect, June 1999

23

APPENDIX D:

SPEAKER BIOGRAPHIC SKETCHES

John L. Atkins III, FAIA, O’Brien AtkinsJohn Atkins is the President and CEO of O’Brien/Atkins Associates, a multidisciplinary design services firm he co-founded in 1975 in the Research Triangle Park, NC, which is an 80-person firm specializing in the design of large-scale, commercial projects. Examples of the firm’s work are: RDU Airport Terminal C; RDU Airport Terminal A and Terminal A Interim Gates; Cisco Systems Office/R&D Buildings 1 through 15; WorldCom Network Management Center and Administration Building in Weston; and Biogen BIO 24 Lab/Administration Building and parking deck. In 1998, O’Brien/Atkins Associates was named the inaugural winner of the American Institute of Architects-North Carolina Firm of the Year Award. Atkins' service to the community includes co-founding both the Research Triangle Regional Partnership and the Greater Triangle Regional Council. He has also been involved with the N.C. Partnership for Economic Development and the Economic Development Coalition 2000. He has served on the board of directors of the N.C. Biotechnology Center and Wachovia Bank & Trust. He is also past president of the Durham Chamber of Commerce. He is currently the First Vice-Chair, NC Citizens for Business and Industry.

Bob Glusenkamp, Rodgers Builders Inc.Bob Glusenkamp is Senior Vice President of Rodgers Builders and received undergraduate degrees in Architecture and Environmental Planning at Ball State University and an MAB from the McColl School of Business at Queens University in Charlotte. He has been the team leader on some of Rodgers Builders' most significant projects, including Belle Meade Retirement Resort in Southern Pines, North Carolina. Bob is a member of the American Institute of Architects (AIA), and past president of the Associated Building Contractors of the Carolinas (ABCC). He serves on the Advisory Board of the Construction Institute at Central Piedmont Community College, the Advisory Board for UNCC College of Architecture and the Board of Trustees for Thompson Children’s Home and Child & Family Focus. Bob is currently a member of Leadership Charlotte Class XXVII. He is a member of the American Institute of Architects, and a past chairman of the Associated Builders and Contractors of the Carolinas (ABCC).

Jeff Huberman, FAIA, Gantt Huberman ArchitectsJeff Huberman is a founding partner in Charlotte-based Gantt Huberman Architects. He is a Fellow in the AIA, and has received AIA North Carolina's Gold Medal for lifetime achievement. He has previously served as president of AIA North Carolina and president of the NC Board of Architecture. He currently serves as a board member of NCARB representing Region 3. He has served on numerous local and state civic and arts-related boards, including being president of Opera Carolina and the Children's Theatre of Charlotte. Jeff is also a painter whose abstract paintings are in many private and public collections, including the Mint Museum of Art's and Bank of America's collections.

24

Michael Smith, Charlotte Center City PartnersMichael Smith is the President of Charlotte Center City Partners, which is dedicated to the promotion and enhancement of business, cultural, retail and residential initiatives in urban core of the Charlotte region.  Smith's background blends corporate and non-profit experience. Originally from Greensboro, North Carolina, Smith holds his MBA from Kellogg Graduate School of Management at Northwestern University and his undergraduate from UNC Chapel Hill.  He has held corporate roles at AT&T Communications, First Union's capital market department and By-Products Interactive.  Prior to his role as President of CCCP, Smith was the Chief Financial Officer at the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce for three years. Smith is very active with the St. Ann's Catholic Parish and serves as the Treasurer of Catholic Social Services for western NC.  He is also active in the community as a founding member and Treasurer of the Charlotte City Committee.  Also, he is a Director for Board of the Charlotte Chamber, the Arts and Science Council and the Hospitality and Tourism Alliance.

Karen Alexander, AIA, LEED, KKA ArchitectsKaren Alexander is the founder and President of KKA Architecture in Salisbury, North Carolina. She is a recipient of the 1998 Gertrude S. Carraway Award from North Carolina Preservation for several historic preservation projects in Salisbury. Her work has been published in numerous national magazines and she is an invited speaker on Sustainable Architecture and Gender Leadership across the nation. She is a past President (2000) of AIA Charlotte and a graduate (M.Arch.) of the College of Architecture at UNC-C. She is an active civic leader as a board director of Wachovia Bank, former Chair of the Salisbury Historic Preservation Commission, and on the Board of Visitors of Livingstone College and the Development Council of Hood Theological Seminary. She is a member of the Board of Trustees and serves as Vice-President for the Historic Salisbury Foundation, and is the Secretary of the Board of Salisbury Community Development Corporation where she was awarded the Sister Barbara Sullivan Humanitarian Award for North Carolina in 2005. A member of the Vision 20/20 Strategic Planning Committee for Salisbury and a member of the Sustainable Community Development Commission appointed by the Rowan County Commissioners, she volunteers her expertise in creating a more livable and sustainable community. Karen was profiled in the Business Journal and a Business Journal Women in Business winner in 2001. Several recent new medical and historic preservation projects won Salisbury Community Appearance Awards from the City of Salisbury, and Historic Preservation Awards from the Salisbury Historic Preservation Foundation. The new Center for the Environment building at Catawba College received the AIA-Charlotte Honor Design Award and AIA-Charlotte Merit Award for Sustainable Design and is the subject of the PBS documentary, “Environmental Partners.” She is an avid supporter of the arts, through contributions to the Waterworks Visual Arts Center, the Rowan-Salisbury Symphony, and the Piedmont Players where KKA Architecture has been a producing partner for over five years.

Kevin McCarthy, DC, MS-Ed., Metanoic Dialogue Group (San Jose, CA)Dr. Kevin McCarthy is the director of Metanoic Dialogue, which explores principles and practices of that facilitate effective learning and leading in today’s complex open

25

systems. Kevin is a Graduate of the Southern California University of Health Sciences with a Bachelors Degree in Science and Doctor of Chiropractic degree. He also received a Masters Degree in Health Professions Education from the University of Southern California. He worked in Chiropractic Education for 20 years during which time he held various administrative positions including Vice President for Academic Affairs for the Palmer University System – a three campus system that had over 10 health care facilities in three different states. He is currently working with Northwestern Health Sciences University, American Leadership Forum, and the Director of the joint Stanford/Harvard Business Schools program “Leadership for Continuous Organizational Renewal.”

David Hinson, AIA, NCARB, Auburn UniversityProfessor Hinson is currently serving as Interim Head, School of Architecture, Auburn University and has previously been Architecture Program Director. He has won an AIA National Housing Design Award (2007), AIA Alabama Honor Award, Outstanding Faculty Member Award (twice) and served as Kellog National Fellow. He is currently on the AIA National IDP Coordinating Committee and was Chair of the Educator-Practitioner Network Advisory Committee (2002-2006), where he continues as Vice-Chair. Most recently, Prof. Hinson (along with fellow professor Stacy Norman) won the ACSA Collaborative Practice Award for their work on the DESIGNHabitat2 house with Habitat for Humanity and Palm Harbor Manufactured Homes.

Ted Landsmark, Assoc. AIA, Boston Architectural College/ACSATed Landsmark is President of Boston Architectural College and current President of the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture. Ted holds a BA in political science and JD and M.Env.Design degrees from Yale University and a Ph.D. in education from Boston University. He has previously been Dean of Graduate and Continuing Education at Massachusetts College of Art and Director of Boston’s Office of Community Partnerships. Landsmark is a scholar of 18-19c. African-American Art and serves as a trustee to numerous arts related foundations including Boston’s Institute of Contemporary Art and the Museum of Fine Arts. Landsmark won The Whitney M. Young Jr. Award in 2006 from the AIA and chaired the AIA’s Diversity Committee which published, “20 on 20/20 Vision: Perspectives on Diversity and Design.”

Wayne Drummond, FAIA, U.Nebraska/NAABWayne Drummond is Dean of the College of Architecture at the University of Nebraska and 2007 President of the National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB). He has served as Dean at Texas Tech University and the University of Florida as well as serving on the boards of ACSA and NAAB. He has served AIA National on the Internship Task Force and Architects in Education committees. At the University of Nebraska he has led the creation of unique Ed.D. and Ph.D. programs with the Department of Educational Administration specializing in architecture education.

Cynthia Wolf Johnson, Ed.DDr. Cynthia Wolf Johnson is Associate Provost for Academic Services at UNC Charlotte and holds faculty appointments as Teaching Associate Professor of Communication

26

Studies and Faculty Affiliate of the Organizational Science Doctoral Program. Prior to joining UNC Charlotte in July 2006, Dr. Wolf Johnson held a fellowship with The University of North Carolina General Administration working in Academic and Student Affairs. Dr. Wolf Johnson held administrative appointments at UNC Chapel Hill for 23 years and taught courses focused on leadership theory and development, leadership and communication, and higher education administration. Dr. Wolf Johnson received her BA from Boston College, MA from the University of Maryland, and Ed.D. from NC State University. Dr. Wolf Johnson also serves as Adjunct Assistant Professor of Adult and Community College Education at NC State University advising doctoral students and is a leadership consultant and trainer with a special focus on multiculturalism. She is currently conducting research on leadership within multiracial, multiethnic environments. Past clients have included Duke University, UNC Chapel Hill’s School of Journalism and MBA Program, Association of Orange County Community Agencies, Hubert H. Humphrey Fellows, Institute of International Education, and BRIDGES: Academic Leadership (Program) for Women.

27